In primary lymph nodal staging of patients with high-risk and intermediate-risk prostate cancer, how critical is the role of Gallium-68 prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography-computed tomography?

被引:19
|
作者
Kulkarni, Smita Chinmay [1 ]
Sundaram, Palaniswamy Shanmuga [1 ]
Padma, Subramanyam [1 ]
机构
[1] Amrita Vishwavidyapeetham, Dept Nucl Med & Mol Imaging, Amrita Inst Med Sci, Kochi, Kerala, India
关键词
Gallium-68 prostate-specific membrane antigen; positron emission tomography-computed tomography; prostate neoplasm; prostate-specific antigen; magnetic resonance imaging; ACCURACY; NODES; MRI; CT;
D O I
10.1097/MNM.0000000000001110
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Objective To assess the diagnostic performance of Gallium-68 prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography-computed tomography (Ga-68-PSMA PET-CT) in primary lymphnodal staging of patients with intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer and to compare it with multiparametric MRI (mp-MRI) whenever available. Materials and methods Ga-68-PSMA PET-CT scans of 51 patients (average age 66.0 +/- 7.0 years) with biopsy-proven intermediate-risk and high-risk prostatic cancer who were managed by radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymph nodal dissection were retrospectively analyzed. Diagnostic performance of Ga-68-PSMA PET-CT in primary lymph nodal staging was analyzed using histopathology as reference. Diagnostic performance of mp-MRI, which was available in 35/51 patients was compared with that of Ga-68-PSMA PET-CT. Results Univariate analysis of patient characteristics showed significant influence of the pathological T-stage and maximum standard uptake value (SUV)max of the primary lesion on presence of nodal metastasis. In 51 patients, for patient-based analysis, the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of Ga-68-PSMA PET-CT in detecting lymphnodal metastases were 80, 90.3 and 86.3%, respectively, and for lesion-based analysis 69.2, 99.6 and 98.4%, respectively. In 35/51 patients (who also had undergone mp-MRI), the patient-based and lesion-based sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of Ga-68-PSMA PET-CT were 81.3, 84.2, 82.8% and 70.9, 99.5, 98.2%, respectively, and that of mp-MRI were 43.7, 78.9, 62.8% and 32.2, 98.5, 95.5%, respectively. For lesion-based analysis, Ga-68-PSMA PET-CT performed better than mp-MRI (P value = 0.04). Conclusion Ga-68-PSMA PET-CT allows accurate detection of lymphnodal metastases in patients with intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer prior to definitive surgical treatment. It performed better than mp-MRI in a subset of patients.
引用
收藏
页码:139 / 146
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Is Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography Imaging Cost-effective in Prostate Cancer: An Analysis Informed by the proPSMA Trial
    Cardet, Rafael E. de Feria
    Hofman, Michael S.
    Segard, Tatiana
    Yim, Jackie
    Williams, Scott
    Francis, Roslyn J.
    Frydenberg, Mark
    Lawrentschuk, Nathan
    Murphy, Declan G.
    Lourenco, Richard De Abreu
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2021, 79 (03) : 413 - 418
  • [32] Impact of Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography on the Therapeutic Decision of Prostate Carcinoma Primary Staging: A Retrospective Analysis at the Brazilian National Public Health System
    da Silva, Anna Carolina Borges
    de Toledo, Luis Gustavo Morato
    de Carvalho Fernandes, Roni
    Ziroldo, Alan Rechamberg
    Sawczyn, Guilherme Vinicius
    Alarcon, Shirlene Tettmann
    Lewin, Fabio
    ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2023, 30 (07) : 4541 - 4549
  • [33] Defining Prostatic Vascular Pedicle Recurrence and the Anatomy of Local Recurrence of Prostate Cancer on Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography
    Dundee, Philip
    Furrer, Marc A.
    Corcoran, Niall M.
    Peters, Justin
    Pan, Henry
    Ballok, Zita
    Ryan, Andrew
    Guerrieri, Mario
    Costello, Anthony J.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY OPEN SCIENCE, 2022, 41 : 116 - 122
  • [34] Comparative study between 68Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography and conventional imaging in the initial staging of prostate cancer
    Wong, Hui Sze
    Leung, John
    Bartholomeusz, Dylan
    Sutherland, Peter
    Le, Hien
    Nottage, Michelle
    Iankov, Ivan
    Chang, Joe H.
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL IMAGING AND RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2018, 62 (06) : 816 - 822
  • [35] The Probability of Metastases Within Different Prostate-specific Antigen Ranges Using Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Prostate Cancer
    Luining, Wietske I.
    Hagens, Marinus J.
    Meijer, Dennie
    Ringia, Joanneke B.
    de Weijer, Tessa
    Bektas, Huseyyin O.
    Ettema, Rosemarijn H.
    Knol, Remco J. J.
    Roeleveld, Ton A.
    Srbljin, Sandra
    Weltings, Saskia
    Koppes, Jose C. C.
    Moorselaar, Reindert J. A. van
    van Leeuwen, Pim J.
    Oprea-Lager, Daniela E.
    Vis, AndreN.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY OPEN SCIENCE, 2024, 59 : 55 - 62
  • [36] Outcomes of Primary Lymph Node Staging of Intermediate and High Risk Prostate Cancer with 68Ga-PSMA Positron Emission Tomography/Computerized Tomography Compared to Histological Correlation of Pelvic Lymph Node Pathology
    Yaxley, John W.
    Raveenthiran, Sheliyan
    Nouhaud, Francois-Xavier
    Samartunga, Hemamali
    Yaxley, Anna J.
    Coughlin, Geoff
    Delahunt, Brett
    Egevad, Lars
    McEwan, Louise
    Wong, David
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2019, 201 (04) : 815 - 820
  • [37] Protocol for the PRIMARY clinical trial, a prospective, multicentre, cross-sectional study of the additive diagnostic value of gallium-68 prostate-specific membrane antigen positron-emission tomography/computed tomography to multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnostic setting for men being investigated for prostate cancer
    Amin, Amer
    Blazevski, Alexandar
    Thompson, James
    Scheltema, Matthijs J.
    Hofman, Michael S.
    Murphy, Declan
    Lawrentschuk, Nathan
    Sathianathen, Niranjan
    Kapoor, Jada
    Woo, Henry H.
    Chalasani, Venu
    Rasiah, Krishan
    van Leeuwen, Pim J.
    Tang, Reuben
    Cusick, Thomas
    Stricker, Phillip
    Emmett, Louise
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2020, 125 (04) : 515 - 524
  • [38] Diagnostic Accuracy of a Combination of Preoperative 68-Ga Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography and Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Localized Prostate Cancer
    Simsek, Alper
    Celen, Sinan
    Duran, Mesut Berkan
    Kucuker, Kursat
    Yagci, Ahmet Baki
    Turk, Nilay Sen
    Yuksel, Dogangun
    Turan, Tahir
    UROLOGIA INTERNATIONALIS, 2024, 108 (04) : 277 - 284
  • [39] Head-to-head Comparison of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Prostate-specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomography and Conventional Imaging Modalities for Initial Staging of Intermediate- to High-risk Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Chow, Kit Mun
    So, Wei Zheng
    Lee, Han Jie
    Lee, Alvin
    Yap, Dominic Wei Ting
    Takwoingi, Yemisi
    Tay, Kae Jack
    Tuan, Jeffrey
    Thang, Sue Ping
    Lam, Winnie
    Yuen, John
    Lawrentschuk, Nathan
    Hofman, Michael S.
    Murphy, Declan G.
    Chen, Kenneth
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2023, 84 (01) : 36 - 48
  • [40] Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Positron Emission Tomographye-Computed Tomography for Prostate Cancer: Distribution of Disease and Implications for Radiation Therapy Planning
    Gupta, Sandeep K.
    Watson, Tahne
    Denham, Jim
    Shakespeare, Thomas P.
    Rutherford, Natalie
    McLeod, Nicholas
    Picton, Kevin
    Ainsworth, Paul
    Bonaventura, Tony
    Martin, Jarad M.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2017, 99 (03): : 701 - 709